Metadata record for Effects of Crime on After-School Youth Development Programs in the United States, 1993-19946791
Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research
ICPSR metadata records are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial 3.0 United States License .
2015-08-02Effects of Crime on After-School Youth Development Programs in the United States, 1993-1994679110.3886/ICPSR06791.v1Chaiken, Marcia R.Please see full citation.Carnegie CorporationUnited States Department of Justice. Office of Justice Programs. National Institute of JusticeB6025 and 94-IJ-CX-0015
Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research
1998-10-152005-11-042005-11-04 On 2005-03-14 new files were added to one
or more datasets. These files included additional setup files as well
as one or more of the following: SAS program, SAS transport, SPSS portable,
and Stata system files. The metadata record was revised 2005-11-04 to
reflect these additions.Chaiken, Marcia R. Effects of Crime on After-School Youth Development Programs in the United States, 1993-1994. ICPSR06791-v1. Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor], 1998. http://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR06791.v1after school programscommunity involvementcrime preventionjuvenile offendersvictimsICPSR.XVII.ENACJD.VII
This study obtained information on youth-serving
organizations around the country that provide constructive activities
for youth in the after-school and evening hours. It was carried out in
collaboration with seven national youth-serving organizations: Boys
and Girls Clubs of America, Boy Scouts of America, Girls Incorporated,
Girl Scouts of the U.S.A., National Association of Police Athletic
Leagues, National 4-H Council and United States Department of
Agriculture 4-H and Youth Development Service, and YMCA of the
U.S.A. The research involved a national survey of affiliates and
charter members of these organizations. Respondents were asked to
provide information about their programs for the 1993-1994 school
year, including summer 1994 if applicable. A total of 1,234
questionnaires were mailed to the 658 youth-serving organizations in
376 cities in October 1994. Survey data were provided by 579 local
affiliates. Information was collected on the type of building where
the organization was located, the months, days of the week, and hours
of operation, number of adults on staff, number and sex of school-age
participants, number of hours participants spent at the program
location, other participants served by the program, and
characteristics of the neighborhood where the program was
located. Questions were also asked about the types of contacts the
organization had with the local police department, types of crimes
that occurred at the location in the school year, number of times each
crime type occurred, number of times the respondent was a victim of
each crime type, if the offender was a participant, other youth, adult
with the program, adult from the neighborhood, or adult stranger,
actions taken by the organization because crimes occurred, and crime
prevention strategies recommended and adopted by the
organization. Geographic information includes the organization's
stratum and FBI region.
Faced with precipitously increasing rates of
violence involving children and teens and other evidence of grim
conditions detrimental to boys and girls, communities around the
United States are seeking effective approaches for creating safer and
more wholesome environments for youth. Youth organizations are
attempting to provide constructive activities in neighborhoods where
many children are at risk of becoming crime victims or offenders, and
many police departments are encouraging their officers to collaborate
with community organizations that implement innovative ways to prevent
crimes involving school-age children. To support these efforts, many
federal agencies and private foundations are sponsoring research to
learn about the needs that must be met and how best to decrease the
number of children and teens involved in criminal incidents while
increasing the number involved in productive activities in wholesome
environments. This study also sought to identify appropriate actions
that could be taken by law enforcement agencies and youth-development
organizations to create safer places for youth, especially approaches
that involved teen participants or approaches that could be carried out
in partnerships between youth-serving organizations and their local
law enforcement agencies. This study was stimulated by and carried out
in collaboration with seven national organizations that have long
played a vital role in fostering the wholesome development of youth in
the United States: Boys and Girls Clubs of America, Boy Scouts of
America, Girls Incorporated, Girl Scouts of the U.S.A., National
Association of Police Athletic Leagues, National 4-H Council and
United States Department of Agriculture 4-H and Youth Development
Service, and YMCA of the U.S.A. This research sought to answer two
questions: (1) What are the dimensions of crime affecting
organizations serving youth in the nonschool hours, and (2) What
approaches can be taken to prevent such crimes?
The research involved a national survey of
affiliates and charter members of the above seven national
organizations. Respondents were asked to provide information about
their programs for the 1993-1994 school year, including summer 1994 if
applicable. A total of 1,234 questionnaires were mailed to the 658
youth-serving organizations in 376 cities in October 1994. Survey data
were provided by 579 local affiliates that were collectively serving
21,000 children during nonschool hours on a typical weekday. Six
hundred affiliates actually responded to the survey. However,
responses from 21 organizations were eliminated from the study sample
because the data they provided were relatively incomplete or contained
numerous logical inconsistencies. Because the survey questionnaire
inadvertently omitted a question about the respondent being a victim
of threats or attacks with weapons, a followup survey was conducted
and a short questionnaire was sent to all 34 respondents who
previously reported any incidents involving weapons taking place in
the program setting during the 1993-1994 program year. To compare the
project data with data collected in surveys of school staff, the
researchers included in the short questionnaire a question about
injury to the respondent as an outcome of an incident involving the
use of a weapon. The researchers also conducted followup interviews
with a small sample of nonrespondents that indicated that turnover in
staff directing youth programs was the primary reason questionnaires
were not completed and returned. The decision was made to prepare the
data for analysis without conducting an additional followup, since the
returned questionnaires did not appear to be biased in terms of crime
rates, and a relatively high rate of returns already had been
achieved.
Information was collected on the type of building
where the organization was located, the months, days of the week, and
hours of operation, number of adults on staff, number and sex of
school-age participants, number of hours participants spent at the
program location, other participants served by the program, and
characteristics of the neighborhood where the program was
located. Questions were also asked about the types of contacts the
organization had with the local police department, types of crimes
that occurred at the location in the school year, number of times each
crime type occurred, number of times the respondent was a victim
of each crime type, if the offender was a participant, other youth,
adult with the program, adult from the neighborhood, or adult
stranger, actions taken by the organization because crimes occurred,
and crime prevention strategies recommended and adopted by the
organization. Geographic information includes the organization's
stratum and FBI region.
1993199419941995Please see geographic coverage.Organizations.All professionally-staffed youth-serving organizations
affiliated with Boys and Girls Clubs of America, Boy Scouts of
America, Girls Incorporated, Girl Scouts of the U.S.A., National
Association of Police Athletic Leagues, National 4-H Council and
United States Department of Agriculture 4-H and Youth Development
Service, and YMCA of the U.S.A.survey data
A stratified random sample of youth-serving organizations
affiliated with the seven national organizations mentioned above
self-enumerated questionnaires

ICPSR data undergo a confidentiality review and are altered when necessary to limit the risk of
disclosure. ICPSR also routinely creates ready-to-go data files along with setups in the major
statistical software formats as well as standard codebooks to accompany the data. In addition to
these procedures, ICPSR performed the following processing steps for this data collection:

Checked for undocumented or out-of-range codes.
A total of 600 questionnaires were returned, for
a total response rate of 49 percent. Of the 658 organizations that
were sent questionnaires, 364 responded, a response rate of 55
percent. Of the 364 cities in the sample, questionnaires were returned
for 240 cities, a response rate of 64 percent. Completed
questionnaires were significantly more likely to be returned by
respondents in organizations with the primary mission of serving youth
in the nonschool hours than by respondents in organizations with
broader mandates. The interim response rate of respondents in the
exclusively youth-serving organizations was 69 percent, and the
interim response rate from respondents in organizations with broader
mandates was 36 percent. Of the 34 original respondents who received
the short questionnaire in the followup survey, 22 returned completed
questionnaires, a response rate of 65 percent.
None.
Ann Arbor, Mi.: Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social ResearchAdditional special permissions, where applicable, are described in the restrictions
field.

Please read the terms of use below. If you agree to them, click on the "I Agree" button to proceed. If you do not agree, you can click on the "I Do Not Agree" button to return to the home page.

ICPSR adheres to the principles of the Data Seal of Approval , which, in part, require the data consumer to comply with access regulations imposed both by law and by the data repository, and to conform to codes of conduct that are generally accepted in higher education and scientific research for the exchange of knowledge and information.

These data are distributed under the following terms of use, which are governed by ICPSR. By continuing past this point to the data retrieval process, you signify your agreement to comply with the requirements stated below:

Privacy of RESEARCH SUBJECTS

Any intentional identification of a RESEARCH SUBJECT (whether an individual or an organization) or unauthorized disclosure of his or her confidential information violates the PROMISE OF CONFIDENTIALITY given to the providers of the information. Therefore, users of data agree:

To use these datasets solely for research or statistical purposes and not for investigation of specific RESEARCH SUBJECTS, except when identification is authorized in writing by ICPSR (netmail@icpsr.umich.edu )

To make no use of the identity of any RESEARCH SUBJECT discovered inadvertently, and to advise ICPSR of any such discovery (netmail@icpsr.umich.edu )

Redistribution of Data

You agree not to redistribute data or other materials without the written agreement of ICPSR, unless:

You serve as the OFFICIAL or DESIGNATED REPRESENTATIVE at an ICPSR MEMBER INSTITUTION and are assisting AUTHORIZED USERS with obtaining data, or

You are collaborating with other AUTHORIZED USERS to analyze the data for research or instructional purposes.

When sharing data or other materials in these approved ways, you must include all accompanying files with the data, including terms of use. More information on permission to redistribute data can be found on the ICPSR Web site.

Citing Data

You agree to reference the recommended bibliographic citation in any publication that employs resources provided by ICPSR. Authors of publications based on ICPSR data are required to send citations of their published works to ICPSR for inclusion in a database of related publications (bibliography@icpsr.umich.edu ) .

Disclaimer

You acknowledge that the original collector of the data, ICPSR, and the relevant funding agency bear no responsibility for use of the data or for interpretations or inferences based upon such uses.

Violations

If ICPSR determines that the terms of this agreement have been violated, ICPSR will act according to our policy on terms of use violations . Sanctions can include:

ICPSR may revoke the existing agreement, demand the return of the data in question, and deny all future access to ICPSR data.

The violation may be reported to the Research Integrity Officer, Institutional Review Board, or Human Subjects Review Committee of the user's institution. A range of sanctions are available to institutions including revocation of tenure and termination.

If the confidentiality of human subjects has been violated, the case may be reported to the Federal Office for Human Research Protections. This may result in an investigation of the user's institution, which can result in institution-wide sanctions including the suspension of all research grants.

A court may award the payment of damages to any individual(s)/organization(s) harmed by the breach of the agreement.

Definitions authorized user - A faculty member, staff member, or student at a member institutionICPSR - Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Researchmember institution - An institutional member of ICPSROfficial/Designated Representative - An individual appointed to represent a university's interests in ICPSR. This individual is also charged with providing user support to campus users. promise of confidentiality - A promise to a respondent or research participant that the information the respondent provides will not be disseminated without the permission of the respondent; that the fact that the respondent participated in the study will not be disclosed; and that disseminated information will include no linkages to the identity of the respondent. Such a promise encompasses traditional notions of both confidentiality and anonymity. Names and other identifying information regarding respondents, proxies, or other persons on whom the respondent or proxy provides information, are presumed to be confidential.research subject - A person or organization observed for purposes of research. Also called a respondent. A respondent is generally a survey respondent or informant, experimental or observational subject, focus group participant, or any other person providing information to a study or on whose behalf a proxy provides information.

In addition, the National Archive of Criminal Justice Data stipulates the following conditions:

Federal law and regulations require that research data collected by the U.S. Department of Justice or by its grantees and contractors may only be used for research or statistical purposes. The applicable laws and regulations may be found in the United States Code, 42 USC Section 3789g(a), the Code of Federal Regulations, 28 CFR 22, and 62 F.R. 35044 (June 27, 1997) (The Federal Confidentiality Order). Accordingly, any intentional identification or disclosure of a person or establishment may violate federal law as well as the assurances of confidentiality given to the providers of the information. Therefore, users of data collected by or with the support from the U.S. Department of Justice and distributed by NACJD or other ICPSR archives must agree to abide by these regulations and understand that ICPSR may report any potential violation to the U.S. Department of Justice.

AVAILABLE. This study is freely available to the general public.

The original collector of the data, ICPSR, and the relevant funding agency bear no
responsibility for use of the data or for interpretations or inferences based upon such uses.